While I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, I do think I have been around long enough to recognise when condescension is used by certain professionals and consultants to create an atmosphere of fear and insecurity that only "they" can advise on a practice of a craft-skill-trade, or resolve a problem because their knowledge is so unique and full of shock and awe.
I don't think anyone particularly cares for an M.D. that talks down to you or tries of overwhelm you with medical jargon, when a simple and direct explanation is usually within most of the patient's grasp. I have been around many MDs in ERs and such, and have seen the really good M.Ds, always able to communicate to patients and family in layman's terms to adequately explain what and why complicated trauma and treatments were occuring.
Greenkeeper or superintendent is a profession that has excellent practitioners from barely highschool educated fellows that have been doing it a very long time and get excellent results consistently, to MS and PHd.s who manage golf courses and once in a while we hear they made a big time boo boo. IN many cases, these supers work in somewhat insecure job environments where Mother Nature and unrealistic membership expectations keeps them fearful. Thus, a nice consultant industry can thrive.
Tom Paul asked a simple question about verti-cutting that several folks offered him some information, and generally correct info, that rendered him a bit more knowledgeable than when he started. I don't see too much above that would render Tom Paul an imbecile or dangerous if he absorbed the info offered him. I don't see where simple turf questions and discussion of various cultural or agronomic practices will rise to the level of protecting closely guarded trade secrets such as passing on nuclear secrets regulated by the NRC. I'm pretty sure that most anyone that passed the minimum science requirement of an undergrad degree, or even AP earth science-biology or chem in highschool, can easily grasp anything written in some of the most widely acclaimed entry level turf science books. I've been in seminars where there was a wide variety of educational levels of supers, and heard them all have different opinons about these vary matters like how fequent and intense to verti-cut. And, at the end of such a discussion, I don't believe you would have much more than what the various lay people and superintendents offered above as an adequate answer to Tom Paul's question.
Dave, you have a well earned reputation for being an authority in your field. I respect that. But, please don't be so condescending if we lay people have a little fun getting into the technical discussion. Remember the M.D. thing above. Realise that many of us are proud that we make the effort to read and learn about turf because it relates to our wider passion about GCA and all things involving the game of golf. We love it when practicing supers correct us, or help us to a deeper understanding of an issue, particularly if they put things in laymans terms, which in my opinon any good consultant can do. And, don't worry if I screw up and over fertilize my lawn, or rent a verticutter or core aerifier and rip up to much turf and ground allowing pest-disease-weed infestation. I won't blame you or any other turf professional who may have suggested the practice. Hopefully not too many of my neighbors will be hurt by any of my missteps either.
